Hi Richard, On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 08:07:02PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Mon, 2023-09-18 at 20:47 -0400, Richard Fontana wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 11:37 AM Mark Wielaard <mark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Likewise for valgrind we have examples of the above. For example the > > > dhat tool which have a GPLv2+ copyright and license header, but also > > > say: > > > > > > /* > > > Parts of this file are derived from Firefox, copyright Mozilla Foundation, > > > and may be redistributed under the terms of the Mozilla Public License > > > Version 2.0, as well as under the license of this project. A copy of the > > > Mozilla Public License Version 2.0 is available at at > > > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/2.0/. > > > */ > > > > > > Again, although there is a reference to MPLv2 here, the code is only > > > available under GPLv2+. > > > > But that notice literally says there is code available under MPL 2.0. > > > > If the notice is incorrect, that is a bug that should be fixed > > upstream. But a mere conflict with a project's conception of what its > > effective license is would not mean that the license notice is > > incorrect. > > In the case of relicensing MPLv2 to GPLv2+ you could indeed argue that > no notice at all should remain in the source file to the MPLv2. The > MPLv2 does indeed require you remove all MPL notices when converting a > source file to the GPL. But again I consider it rude to not even > mention the origin of the source code and provide a (historical) > reference. So in the above case, what would be your advice? Should upstream change that notice that tells the user the original code (over there) is also available under the MPL, but that this derived version is only distributed under the GPL? Or should they just completely remove the reference to the original MPL code? I assume the License tag in the above case would simply be GPL-2.0-or-later without any mention of the MPL? Thanks, Mark -- _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
